Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32424311›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2020

Phylogenetic tree building in the genomic age.

Paschalia Kapli, Ziheng Yang, Maximilian J Telford

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 243 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
243citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

243 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Animals have expanded the evolutionary legacy of unicellular ancestors in blood cells.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

183 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Paschalia KapliCentre for Life's Origins and Evolution, Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8769-8779
Ziheng YangCentre for Life's Origins and Evolution, Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3351-7981
Maximilian J TelfordCentre for Life's Origins and Evolution, Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, UK. m.telford@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3749-5620

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/R016240/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Knowing phylogenetic relationships among species is fundamental for many studies in biology. An accurate phylogenetic tree underpins our understanding of the major transitions in evolution, such as the emergence of new body plans or metabolism, and is key to inferring the origin of new genes, detecting molecular adaptation, understanding morphological character evolution and reconstructing demographic changes in recently diverged species. Although data are ever more plentiful and powerful analysis methods are available, there remain many challenges to reliable tree building. Here, we discuss the major steps of phylogenetic analysis, including identification of orthologous genes or proteins, multiple sequence alignment, and choice of substitution models and inference methodologies. Understanding the different sources of errors and the strategies to mitigate them is essential for assembling an accurate tree of life.

Indexed as

GenomeGenomicsModels, GeneticPhylogenyAnimalsComputational BiologyCrosses, GeneticDatabases, GeneticEvolution, MolecularGenetic HeterogeneityHumans

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.